Tag Archives: Ray Neidl

Post navigation

We offer this excerpt of thoughts from analyst Ray Neidl of the Maxim Group, from an investment note he issued after the Allied Pilots Association voted to approve a new contract with American Airlines:

– “With a new contract, American Airlines has mostly completed its reorganization. This was one of the last big hurdles to clear before the carrier and its creditors could focus on the big strategic question of what the new carrier should be and if American should pursue a merger with US Airways or remain independent.”

– “Advantages of a merger would give the enlarged entity the size to compete with Delta Air Lines and United Airlines, both of which overtook American after their own mergers with other carriers in recent years. We believe the disadvantage would be that it would be a difficult merger to engineer and could create major disruptions over at least the next two years.”

– “We still believe that American would prefer to emerge as a stand-alone carrier but it will have to go along with the unsecured creditors, especially the unsecured creditors committee, which are the new owners of the company and at the end of the day will take the deal that they believe is best for them.”

– “Whichever direction the situation develops in now having a pilots contract gives the unsecured creditors the opportunity to value the future prospects of the company both as a stand-alone entity or in a merger with U.S. Airways. We expect to see rapid movement going forward and as chances improve for a merger U.S. Airway’s stock price to strengthen and unsecured claims at American to strengthen in price.”

Senior aerospace analyst Ray Neidl, who’s been around long enough to remember these things, wondered out loud Tuesday whether the American Airlines standoff with pilots is following the path of the Eastern Air Lines’ flight with its unions.

Or, in Neidl’s words in a report out Tuesday from his firm, Maxim Group:

“The dispute with the pilots recalls how the pilots at Eastern Airlines killed the already weakened airline two decades ago in a labor dispute. The unions led by the pilots have strongly indicated that they do not wish to work with the AMR management, which is of concern to begin with. As a result the dispute here seems to now be going beyond economic considerations to the emotional level, which is always dangerous since rationality for all parties can become secondary as was in the case of Eastern.

“Although we do not believe conditions at AMR have reached anywhere near this level as yet, we do remain concerned that it could escalate in what is a weak economy and if not resolved could lead to a possible further weakening and eventual liquidation of the company. US Airways and other airlines could then pick up parts of the company by buying various assets that had value but not necessarily guaranteeing jobs for AMR employees.”

Eastern shut down its operations in January 1991 after a long period of management-labor strife highlighted by strikes by mechanics, pilots and flight attendants that began in March 1989. Eastern had filed for bankruptcy court protection shortly after the strikes began.

Neidl called the pilots “the most important single labor group and an agreement with them is important. We were surprised that the membership voted down the contract offer since it included a large equity offering.”

He said American’s operational problem “appears to be individual pilot actions of calling in sick or increasing reports of maintenance deficiencies forcing flight delays or cancelations. The pilots union has been strong in its statements saying that this was no organized job action, which is illegal, but never-the-less it has caused temporary inconvenience for customers. We believe that any job actions organized or otherwise, hurt the company in the short-term if it continues.”